Page images
PDF
EPUB

Lyons, still the court would have no jurisdiction. He must, adjourned it for the consideration of the Chief Judge.] Ex therefore, dismiss the application, with costs.

Solicitors for the trustee, Crump & Son.

Solicitors for the Credit Lyonnais, Michael Abrahams & Co.

parte Thorne had not the slightest analogy in principle to this case. The rules were directory merely.

Mr. REGISTRAR MURRAY said the fact was not brought to his notice that the papers had been filed, for if it had he would not have made the order. He acquitted Mr.

(Before Mr. REGISTRAR MURRAY, acting as Chief Judge.) Tilley of stating in his affidavit what was not the fact, but

Nov. 24.-Re Lloyd.

Order obtained ex parte, giving a proxy leave to sign resolutions for composition proposed at second meeting of creditors, rescinded.

This was an application on behalf of one of the creditors under a petition for liquidation presented by the debtor for an order to rescind or set aside the order made on the 3rd of November by Mr. Registrar Murray, acting as Chief Judge, giving Mr. Samuel Tilley leave to sign the resolutions purporting to have been come to at the second meeting of creditors held on the 29th of October, as proxy for R. A. Yerbury, one of the creditors.

It appeared that Mr. Yerbury, a creditor for £155, attended the first meeting by his proxy, Mr. Tilley, and voted in favour of the resolutions which were then put to the meeting for payment of a composition of 3s. 6d. in the pound in satisfaction of the debts. He received notice of the second meeting, which his son attended with a view to ascertain the result, and to know if the resolutions agreed to at the first meeting were confirmed at the second, but he gave his son no authority to vote, nor did his son hold any proxy for that purpose. Mr. Yerbury had already given a proxy to Mr. Tilley, and it was his desire that Mr. Tilley should vote for him in favour of the confirmation of the resolutions.

Mr. Tilley, the proxy, in his affidavit, stated that he attended the second meeting under the petition, and, hearing that a Mr. Yerbury was present, he was under the impression that it was the creditor, R. A. Yerbury, and not the son, and he did not, therefore, exercise his power of voting as proxy, being under the impression that the creditor, being present, would sign for himself. He had since ascertained that the son only was present; that he had no proxy on behalf of his father; and that it was the father's wish that the deponent should act for him as before, and do all things that were necessary for the purpose of confirming the resolutions which were passed at the first meeting of creditors. Mr. Tilley added that, had he known the real facts, he would have signed the resolution on behalf of R. A. Yerbury.

The resolutions were brought into the office and filed on the 2nd of November, but a doubt having arisen whether a numerical majority of creditors had been obtained to the resolutions without the signature of R. A. Yerbury or his proxy, an application was made ex parte on the 3rd of November to Mr. Registrar Murray for leave to sign nunc pro tunc, on the ground of inadvertence on the part of the proxy, and he granted the application. On the 4th of November a petition for adjudication of bankruptcy was presented against Lloyd, and the present application followed.

Miller (solicitor), in support of the application. The order giving the proxy leave to sign was made ex parte and could not be supported. Notice of the application should have been given to the dissenting creditors: Ex parte Vendrell (25 SOLICITORS' JOURNAL, 31). [Mr. REGISTRAR MURRAY.-It is quite clear the fact was not brought to my notice that the papers had been filed at the office. There is no doubt about the right to sign, if it be done before the papers are brought in] Ex parte Thorne, Re Butlin (21 W. R. 763, L. R. 8 Ch. 722). was a conclusive authority against the application. Rule 275 showed that the signatures might be subscribed subsequently to the meeting, but prior to the filing or registration of the resolution. The creditor was a person aggrieved by the order, and he asked that it should be rescinded. Mr. Registrar Brougham had very recently followed the decision in Ex parte Thorne, and had refused to allow a signature to be added to resolutions after they were filed: Ex parte Stewart, Re Hargrave (25 SOLICITORS' JOURNAL, 51).

H. Reed, for the respondent.—The omission to sign arose throngh a mistake of fact, the proxy having attended each of the meetings. In Ex parte Thorne the creditors changed their minds, and the decision in that case did not apply. The Chief Judge had allowed the signatures of creditors to be added after the resolutions were brought in: Re Wehner (20 W. R. 199). [Mr. REGISTRAR MURRAY. That case occurred in 1872, before Ex parte Thorne, and I

he omitted to state a circumstance which was material. Looking at the case of Ex parte Thorne, by which he was bound, he must refuse the application, notwithstanding the argument that in this particular case there were special circumstances which distinguished it from Ex parte Thorne. There the attention of the Lords Justices was distinctly brought to the 275th rule, and their lordships said the registrar had no power to allow signatures to be added after the resolutions were filed. That was the effect of the judgment, and sitting here as Chief Judge he was bound by it. The order must be rescinded, with costs. Solicitors for the applicant, Miller & Miller. Solicitors for the respondent, Tilley & Soames.

[blocks in formation]

The court will not adjudicate a debtor bankrupt under the 11th clause of section 126 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, upon the application of one only of his creditors, where a probability exists of a portion of the composition being recovered from a surety.

This was an application by Messrs. Nash & Lienard, firm of wine merchants, for an adjudication of bankruptcy against the Earl of Perth and Melfort under the 11th clause of section 126 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869.

That

The Earl of Perth filed a petition for liquidation under sections 125 and 126 of the Bankruptcy Aot, 1869, in May, 1877, and at the first meeting, held on the 4th of June, resolutions were passed to the following effect :To accept a composition of 5s. in the £1, payable by twenty instalments of threepence each every six months, the whole to be paid within the period of ten years. the covenant of the Countess of Perth, wife of the debtor, should be accepted as security for the payment of the sum of £250 every six months to trustees until they should have received sufficient to pay the composition. In consideration of the creditors passing the resolutions, the earl agreed to enter into a covenant with the trustees that in the event of his succeeding upon an appeal to the House of Lords, and obtaining the estates claimed by him or any part thereof, to pay to such trustees within six months such a sum as would be sufficient to pay the creditors the full amount of their debts, and interest. By the terms of the resolutions trustees were appointed to receive and distribute the composition, and, at a meeting held on the 18th of June, 1877, the resolutions were confirmed by the creditors, and on the 25th of June they were duly registered.

The applicants were creditors of the debtor at the date of the liquidation petition for the sum of £67 2s. 9d., and they alleged that neither of the instalments of the composition had been paid to them or to the trustees by the debtor or the countess. The liabilities at the time of the presentation of the petition were about £13; no assets.

Sidney Woolf, in support of the application.-The composition in this case could not proceed without injustice or undue delay to the creditors, and the applicants were entitled to an adjudication: Ex parte Charlton (26 W. R. 468, L. R. 6 Ch. D. 45); and the power to adjudicate might be exercised more than six months after the filing of the petition for liquidation.

C. H. Turner, for the respondent.-This was not a case in which the court would proceed to an immediate adjudication. There was no evidence that the debtor's property required protection, and the applicants did not show that they had pressed the trustees to proceed against the debtor or his wife under their covenants. The court had a discretion in these cases, and the applicants, who were creditors for a small amount only, had no absolute right to an adjudication. He referred to rules 266 and 267.

Theodore Lumley (solicitor), for the trustees.-Ex parte Chariton did not apply. The trustees had reason to believe that they would obtain a decree in the Chancery Division

98

THE SOLICITORS' JOURNAL.

against the separate estate of the countess. The applicants had not communicated with the trustees in reference to the adoption of proceedings under the covenants, and, if they were aggrieved by any act of theirs, they had their remedy. The Act did not apply in a case where one creditor stood in an isolated position from the others.

Woolf, in reply.-The position of the surety was unaffected by the bankruptcy of the debtor; the surety remained liable: Ex parte Gilbey, Re Bedell (26 W. R. 768, L. R. 8 Ch. D. 248); Glegg v. Gilbey (25 W. R. 42, L. R. 2 Q. B. D. 209). He also cited Ex parte Waterer (22 W. R. 426).

Mr. REGISTRAR HAZLITT said the clause upon which the application rested provided that if it appeared to the court on satisfactory evidence that a composition could not, in consequence of legal difficulties, or for any sufficient cause, proceed without injustice or undue delay to the creditors, or to the debtor, the court might adjudge the debtor a bankrupt. The words were, "to the creditors," but here the only applicants were a firm whose debt was £67 odd. As no other creditor concurred, he did not think, as a matter of discretion -there still appearing to be a possibility of recovering something under the covenant of the countess-that he would do right if he adjudicated the debtor a bankrupt. The application would be dismissed, but without costs.

Solicitors for the applicants, Lindo & Co.
Solicitor for the respondent, W. A. Smith.
Solicitors for the trustees, Lumley & Lumley.

[merged small][ocr errors]

"The first question I understand to be, whether the Council of Judges should make a recommendation to her Majesty in Council to the effect that the common law divisions of the High Court of Justice should be reduced in number from three divisions to one. I think that such a recommendation should be made, and I desire to add shortly my reasons, which, it will be seen, reach beyond the proposition immediately before the council.

Dec. 4, 1880.

Supreme Court of Judicature; and from this strictly logical
point of view, the retention of the offices of Lord Chief
Justice o England and of the Master of the Rolls could no
more be justified than the retention of the offices now in
question. I entertain, however, a strong conviction that
the abolition of any of these great offices would be attended
with injurious consequences to the judicial bench and to
the public service. Many delicate and invisible springs
would be touched, and I believe that the quality and tone,
especially of the bench of first instance, would suffer
seriously from the absence of these high judicial officers,
and from other indirect but inevitable consequences of with-
drawing them from that bench. The office of judge is less
attractive than it was thirty years ago; the duties and labour
are more continuous and incessant; they are heavier and
more difficult; the expenses are greater, and the salary, re-
latively to the value of money, much less. On the other hand,
the receipts of prosperous men in all kinds of business have
greatly increased and are increasing; and I doubt the
wisdom in these days, when wealth is increasing and uni-
versal education is spreading, of making the judicial bench
of first instance less an object of ambition to the rising genera-
tion than it has been in the past. I think, even further,
that the High Court of Appeal and the appellate tribunal in
the House of Lords would also gradually suffer and deterio-
rate from certain indirect but inevit ible consequences which
can be foreseen, but which need not be particularized.

"I am not able, therefore, to concur in the recommenda-
tions for the abolition of the offices in question.

"The fixed and formal barriers by which the Supreme Court of Judicature is at present separated-first, into two great divisions, and, secondly, into further sub-divisions of the High Court of Justice-might all be removed with great practical advantage. Their removal would be attended with vast economy of judicial strength and a general elevation of the judicial bench. The confusion and inconvenience apprehended by some might be easily avoided by a careful division, classification, and distribution of the multifarious business over which the court would have jurisdiction. The Supreme Court of Judicature is now formally separated into two divisions-namely, the Court of Appeal and the High Court of Justice. The Court of Appeal, although not formally separated into divisions, sits in several divisions, the individual Lords Justices being interchangeable. The High Court of Justice is formally separated into five divisions, and one of these, the Chancery Division, divides itself practically into five distinct sub-divisions, each, for the sake of convenience, being distinguished by the name of the presiding judge. There would appear, therefore, to be no insuperable practical difficulty in distributing the whole body of judges of a single Supreme Court over as many courts, having cognizance of as many distinct varieties of business, classified and divided as convenience might suggest, without any formal divisions of the court. My view is that the business, not the court, should be divided and classified according to natural divisions, and appropriately distributed among the judges of the Supreme Court-as for example, high appellate business to the Lords Justices of Appeal; Revenue business to certain of the judges annually fixed; election business the same; inferior appellate business in like manner; circuit business to all the judges of the Supreme Court; Crown cases reserved to a court of judges annually selected, and so on.

"WATKIN WILLIAMS."

SOCIETIES.

LAW ASSOCIATION.

At the usual monthly meeting of the directors, held at the hall of the Incorporated Law Society, Chancery-lane, on Thursday, December 2, the following being present, viz., Mr. Desborough, chairman; and Messrs. Boodle, Burges, Clabon, Drew, Desborough, jun., Hedger, Parkin, Scadding, Sawtell, and Smith, and A. B. Carpenter (secretary), grants of £10 were made to two non-members and the ordinary general business was transacted.

"The second question relates to the abolition of the offices of the Chief Justice of Common Pleas and Chief Baron of the Exchequer. Here, again, my reasons extend beyond the immediate question. I believe that, in treating the question logically, and excluding remote and indirect consequences, it would be difficult to assign any sufficient reason for the retention of more than one chief over the judges of the

LEEDS INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY.
The annual general meeting of this society was held on
the 19th ult., at the Law Institute, Albion-place, Leeds,
There were present Mr. T. Marshall, president, in the
chair; Messrs. J. Latimer, O. Eddison, G. H. Nelson,
J. Rider, J. C. Malcolm, W. Clarke, A. L. Booth, F. H. Barr,
J. S. Newstead, J. D. Kay, J. Scott, B. R. Burrell, W. B.
Craven, E. Wilson, and G. W. Morrison.

The report having been taken as read, it was proposed
by the PRESIDENT, seconded by Mr. BARR, and resolved :-
"That the report of the committee and the treasurer's
account, now presented, be received and adopted."

Considerable discussion took place upon the suggestions
for the negotiation of sales and loans, and establishing a
legal exchange, contained in the report. Mr. E. WILSON
referred to a report drawn up by Mr. F. EDDISON and
himself bearing upon this subject.

It was moved by Mr. J. D. KAY, seconded by Mr. J. S. NEWSTEAD, and resolved :-"That books, as recommended in the report, be kept for the entry of sales, mortgages, and like transactions."

It was also moved by Mr. G. H. NELSON, seconded by Mr. A. L. Boотн, and resolved:-"That members of the Leeds Law Society, who can conveniently do so, attend the Law Institution on Thursday in each week, from one to half-past one o'clock."

Messrs. J. W. Middleton, J. Rider, R. H. Braithwaite, and W. B. Craven were elected members of the committee Mr. T. Marshall was re-elected hon. secretary for the ensuing year. Mr. J. D. Kay was re-elected hon. treasurer for the ensuing year. Messrs. Arthur Copson Peake, Richard Burrough Hopkins, James Beaumont, and Harry Alexander Child were elected members of the society.

A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the business of the meeting.

qants from the report:

semmittee have to report the
te de institution, and to thank
ema by ne of the room contributed to

that all the members will further
the society by the use of the rooms
preity. Notwithstanding these
sonite cannot but think that the
t be made still more useful to the
members having money to lend
call be induced to leave particulars of
es at the Institution. It is possible
engis dis ke the publicity which would

as being placed in the sale room,
sathe to persons who are not members;
y it is suggested that two books
ed in the library or office, one
money to be lent or property for
zcfered. These books would
n of members, but of no other per

think that by this means sales to be conveniently negotiated. The the law institution as a place of members, at certain fixed times,

the attention of the committee. 12 has now arrived when the experisixtied. As its success will depend on

gran to it by the members genera ly, are the matter in their hands, with dinin favour of fixing certain times night meet at the society's rooms for

-It having been matter of mes district registrars of the Court in probate business in their was investigated by a committee rporated Law Society. From the committee, and from information fur

District Registrars by way of ob

fa mpers, it appeared to your committee that
De district registrars were in the habit

professional nature in their own
Papag for such business. The rules of
detrict registrars of that court
transacting business for them-
so, in the registries to which
many probate registries the regis
stors by post papers leading to
Syndading on those papers assists

scharged for, and the amount re

the registrars for their own use. The
par acts, not as the solicitor,

directly concerned, did not
make the practice less an in-
Court, and they accordingly, on the
ed the folowing resolution:-"That
ty, it is improper that district
not solicitors should act at all in

dates the agen's for other solicitors,
improper that such registrars
bate cases in their own districts."
¿sence of opinion as to the propriety
part of several law societies, and the
Amittee to involve a somewhat

ple, on the 17th of June your
confirmation of the resolution
ry, the flowing resolution:-
od this society, it is not in accord-
the rales of the Court of Pro-
aws of the Court of Probate should
r in their own registries; it
to retired, as part of their official
Sen tog to grant, and to forward
to the public if district
50% of the reasons on which
sher fee than the cost of postage."
the Incorporated Law Society
the Associated Provincial Law So-

- important series of Bills for facili40; for simplifying and imher dispositions of settled land alexeyancing, and fr amendin

The following are extracts from the report:

Law Institution.-The committee have to report the continued success of the law institution, and to thank those members who have by use of the room contributed to that success. They hope that all the members will further extend the usefulness of the society by the use of the rooms on every practicable opportunity. Notwithstanding these gratifying results, the committee cannot but think that the law institution might be made still more useful to the profession than at present if members having money to lend or securities to offer could be induced to leave particulars of their money or securities at the Institution. It is possible that some members might dislike the publicity which would follow from these particulars being placed in the sale room, or in other rooms accessible to persons who are not members; but to meet this difficulty it is suggested that two books should be kept and placed in the library or office, one containing particulars of money to be lent or property for sale, and the other of securities offered. These books would be open to the inspection of members, but of no other persons; and the committee think that by this means sales and loans might often be conveniently negotiated. The practicability of utilizing the law institution as a place of common meeting for the members, at certain fixed times, has frequently occupied the attention of the committee. They think that the time has now arrived when the experiment might at least be tried. As its success will depend on the amount of support given to it by the members generally, the committee prefer to leave the matter in their hands, with a general recommendation in favour of fixing certain times during which members might meet at the society's rooms for transacting business.

various particulars the law of property ("The Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1880"); and for making better provision respecting the remuneration of solicitors in conveyancing and other non-contentious business ("The Solicitors Remuneration Act, 1880 "); were brought into the first session of Parliament by the late Lord Chancellor. The last of these Bills empowered a committee of judges to make general orders for the remuneration of solicitors in conveyancing and other non-contentious business, either by rates of commission, or percentage, or by a gross sum, or by a fixed sum for each document prepared or perused, without regard to length, or in any other mode, or partly in one mode and partly in another or others, and with power to regulate the remuneration with reference to various considerations specified in the Bill. The Bill went on to provide that where general orders prescribed or allowed remuneration by way of commission or percentage, a solicitor should not be entitled to recover under any agreement a greater amount than the scale provided. This seemed so obviously impolitic and unfair that steps were taken by the chief law society, with the assistance of your own and other country so ieties, to have the clause struck out, and this was eventually done. The Bill in question, although defective in various respects, and especially in excluding the Incorporated Law Society from the body appointed to frame rules, yet marks an important stage in the effort to substitute scales of commission for bills of costs.

Additional Civil Assize at Leeds.-The secretary of the Leeds Chamber of Commerce has requested the co-operation of your society in an intended application for an additional civil assize at Leeds. The committee have informed the chamber that they will be glad to co-operate with the Chamber of Commerce for the intended purpose.

THE IRISH INCORPORATED

LAW SOCIETY.

The annual meeting of the Incorporated Law Society of
Ireland was held on the 26th ult., in the Solicitors' Hall,
pied the chair. The report was taken as read.
Four Courts. Mr. Henry Augustas Dillon, president, occu-

District Probate Registrars.-It having been matter of -complaint that in some cases district registrars of the Court of Probate acted professionally in probate business in their own registries, the subject was investigated by a committee of the Council of the Incorporated Law Society. From the report made by that committee, and from information furnished by the Association of District Registrars, by way of ob servations upon that report, it appeared to your committee that as a matter of fact some district registrars were in the habit of transacting business of a professional nature in their own registries, and of charging for such business. The rules of the Court of Probate prohibit district registrars of that court from directly or indirectly transacting business for themselves or for any other persons, in the registries to which they are appointed. In many probate registries the registrar receives from the solicitors by post papers leading to grant, and by settling and advising on those papers assists the solicitors. This work is charged for, and the amount received is retained by the registrars for their own use. The fact that the probate registrar acts, not as the solicitor, but as the agent for the solicitor directly concerned, did not appear to your committee to make the practice less an infringement of the Rules of Court, and they accordingly, on the 18th of February, passed the following resolution :-"That in the opinion of this society, it is improper that district probate registrars who are not solicitors should act at all in probate business, and equally improper that such registrars as are solicitors should act as the agents for other solicitors, or should practise in probate cases in their own districts." There being some difference of opinion as to the propriety of this practice on the part of several law societies, and the matter appearing to your committee to involve a somewhat important question of principle, on the 17th of June your committee passed, in confirmation of the resolution of the 18th of February, the following resolution: "That, in the opinion of this society, it is not in accordance with the intention of the rules of the Court of Protate that district registrars of the Court of Probate should act as agents of other solicitors in their own registries; it would, however, be a convenience to the public if district probate registrars were required, as part of their official duty, to receive papers leading to grant, and to forward-namely, that the office in question should be held by a grant by post without other fee than the cost of postage." This resolution, with a statement of the reasons on which it was based, was sent to the Incorporated Law Society and to the members of the Associated Provincial Law Societies.

The CHAIRMAN said the report enabled the profession to see that the outgoing council had not been idle during the past year with regard to a matter of primary importance-the schedule of fees. He thought they had reasonable ground for expressing regret that the judges had not as yet been able to dispose of the memorial sent forward in January, 1879. No doubt, there had been in the interval much political excitement. There was a change of Government and a change in the highest legal functionary in the country; but the council, as well as the previous one, had given an enormous amount of time and trouble to the question, and he hoped the judges would soon see their way to finally dispose of the suggestions of the society as to the amendments of the fees, which justice required. He hoped the incoming council would not lose sight of the matter until it was dealt with one way or the other. He expressed the same hope as to the matter of fees in interlocutory motions. At present, this anomalous state of things existed that the costs awarded to the parties who succeeded did not sometimes amount to the costs out of pocket. Another question which he hoped to see brought by the new council to a successful issue was the appointment of Solicitor to the Inland Revenue. The society made no personal complaint against the member of the bar recently appointed to that office. He was a gentleman of high respectability, but they did complain, and strongly, that any other but a solicitor should be selected for the post.

The bar had a great number of lucrative appointments open to them, the solicitors very few; and they would never cease their exertions until they so altered the law as to enable the original intention to be carried out

solicitor, and a solicitor only. He repeated, the bar had a great many good offices legitimately open to them, and he certainly felt that they ought to be satisfied without seeking to take from the solicitors one of the very important appointments now left to their profession. The Land Bills.-An important series of Bills for facili- Last session a considerable crop of bills more or less affecttating sales, leases, and other dispositions of settled landing the profession was introduced into Parliament, but all ("The Settled Land Act, 1880"); for simplifying and im- fell through owing to the enormous pressure of public busiproving the practice of conveyancing, and for amending in ness of great importance. Several of these bills were to

100

THE SOLICITORS' JOURNAL.

be re-introduced in the coming session, and he was sure the incoming council would in dealing with them watch carefully over the interests of the profession. He begged to move the adoption of the report.

Mr. ROBERT K. CLAY (Messrs. Casey & Clay), said he had great pleasure in seconding the motion, and bearing testimony to the earnest and zealous labours of the council during the past year. He hoped that no effort would be spared by the new council to effect a change in the law with regard to the appointment of Solicitor to the Inland Revenue. The matter was a difficult one, but he was sure they would receive the cordial and efficient aid in Parliament of Mr. Findlater, whose exertions for the interests of the profession in the matter of the Local Bankruptcy Bill deserved their warmest thanks. With respect to the schedule of fees, he thought the bar ought to give help to the solicitors in the matter.

The report was then adopted.

The SECRETARY brought up the report of the scrutineers of the ballot for the council for 1881.

On the motion of Mr. ROBERT K. CLAY, seconded by Mr. JAMES LANE, president of the Southern Law Club, the report of the scrutineers was adopted.

Mr. Dix having been called to the second chair,

Mr. WILLIAM FINDLATER, M.P., moved a vote of thanks to Mr. H. A. Dillon for his conduct in the chair, and for his most valuable services to the profession during his year of office. Mr. Dillon had shown himself pre-eminently the right man in the right place. He had shown great ability in the discharge of his duties, and his attention to the interests of the profession was beyond praise. The urbanity and kindness with which he received every suggestion made his presidency a pleasant memory to the whole profession. He hoped that the time was not distant when they would see Mr. Dillon again filling the position he was 80 capable of filling.

Mr. WILLIAM ROCHE seconded the vote of thanks, and expressed his sincere feeling of admiration of the way Mr. Dillon had discharged his duties as president.

The resolution was passed by acclamation.

Davison, George
Draper, W. H. M.
Eccles, J. C.
Elliott, F. P.
Ellis, C. M. J.
Emerson, C. A.
English, A.
Eyles, George
Fellows, H. S. L.
Fielder, A.
Flegg, J. M.
Flegg, W. C.
Grabb, J.
George, H. T.
Gilling, A. W.
Grant, C. P., B.A.
Grant, J. H.
Gray, R. W.
Greenwood, Walter
Guise, J. W.
Hamilton, J. L.
Hanrott, A. G.
Hardcastle, F.
Harman, A. J.
Harris, F. J.

Harrison, C. E., LL.B.
Harwood, W. E.
Heaton, C. D.
Higson, J. W.
Hills, Walter
Holden, T. L.
Holme, G. J.
Holmes, A. H.
Holmes, Arthur
Homfray, Alfred
Hopkins, A. E.
Howard, Frank
Hoyle, E. E.
Hughes, A. H.
Hutton, W. H.

Mr. HENRY A. DILLON having briefly acknowledged the Isbell, J. G. compliment,

The proceedings terminated.

[blocks in formation]

James, A. E., B.A.
James, A. P.
Jeavons, S.
Jehu, J. D.
Jenkins, J. T.
Jenkins, Robert
Jessop, G. H.
Johnson, Thomas
Jones, H. P.
Jones, Thomas
Jordan, J. D.

Kempthorne, J. W.
Kirkland, G. E.
Langton, J. D.
Law, James

[blocks in formation]

Dec. 4, 1880.

Linton, Robert

Lloyd, G. W.
MacColla, C. J.

Mallam, E. C.
Maylett, William
Mole, C.

Monnington, Alfred, B.A.
Morris, A. W.
Newall, G. W.
Newman, Thomas
Nicholson, A. W.
O'Beirne, R. L.
Owen, John
Paine, W. R.
Peake, R.
Pedder, John
Penny, J. J., B.A.
Pierce, J. H.

Pope, John, jun., M.A.
Price, John
Rhys, P. T.
Richards, L.
Robertson, C. H. de G.
Robinson, Thomas
Royle, H. J.
Rycroft, F. W. R.
Salisbury, F. G., B.A.
Sandys, Allan
Sankey, P. E.
Seward, J. E.
Sims, William
Skipper, A. J.
Smith, James Shakspeare
Smith, John James
Smith, W. G. S.
Smith, W. J.

Snell, F. A.
Stewart, W. J.
Strickland, F. de B.
Sumner, R. T.
Sutcliffe, G. G. O.
Tempest, C. W.
Thomas, A. W.
Thompson, William
Tregaskis, E. J.
Twynam, George
Walker, A. F.
Walpole, H. O. C.
Ward, E. J.
Watson, W. J.
Wells, L. McF.
White, F. C.

Whitehead, F. C. M.
Wilkin, E.
Willoughby, A. F.
Wilson, J. C.
Winter, F. B.
Wooley, C. D.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

DISTRIT LAW STUDENTS'
SOCIETY.

y nesting of the above society was
Ly, on Tuesday, the 23rd inst.,
Escator, presiding, at which there
The question for debate was as
selfty sacks of flour to B.;
mi at the same time pays for
on afterwards, A. gives written notice
within fourteen days B. removes and pays
grah, A wil rescind the contract and re-
angled to remove and pay for the
ss them at an advanced price.
matan an action against A. for
y of the remaining sacks, and, if so,
The measure of such damages?" The
ande des were primarily represented

and Bennett respectively. During
with which the majority of those
yaments were brought to bear on

tions drawn between certain and finally, after a summing up Action was put to the meeting, and in the affirmative. The question damages was not precisely ascertained,

that it was one for a jury. A ben brought the meeting to a

LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.
this society for the present session
the Law Library, Cross-street,
hagyd J. W. Hamilton, Esq., LL.B.,
Batter for debate was as follows:-

swile a sum of money for dress
nine, but upon condition that she
Notwithstanding this, his wife
tres from B., a draper, on credit.
, and the articles necessaries, in the
able to the wife's degree and condition
between her and her husband that

is unknown to B., the trades-
alingam an action against A. for the
sid to his wife? (2) Has he any
her separate property? (3.) Is he
Mrs. A. Smith and Steinberg, who,
red them, were necessarily hampered
Ee of Lords on Saturday last in
Ko, bat, nevertheless, made a
d their contention, argued that ques-
wered in the affirmative. Messrs.
el that the remedy of B. would be
l be entirely remediless. In the
property, and Messrs. Law
Lesers. Rycrof, Peacock, Rayner,
Lee, and Butcher (bcn. sec.)
arma haring summed up the
two questions were answered in
therefore, was affirmed.
were then given to the chairman.

LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY. The weekly meeting of this society was held at the Law Institution, on Tuesday evening, Mr. W. Bartlett in the chair. The question appointed for the evening's debate was the following:-"A. dies insolvent, leaving B. his executor, to whom he owes a debt. C., another creditor, obtains a judgment for administration of A.'s estate, and an order appointing a receiver, who gets in sufficient funds to pay B.'s debt. B. applies for payment of his debt out of the amount in the receiver's hands in priority to the other credi

tors.

Is he so entitled ?" and was opened in the affirmative by Mr. J. K. Wright. The following gentlemen addressed the society on the same side: Mr. Henry Mossop, Mr. Green, and Mr. Spiers; and the following in the negative: Messrs. Kirk, Napier, and Van Sommer. The question on being put to the meeting was decided in the affirmative by one vote.

UNITED LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.

The usual weekly meeting of this society was held on Wednesday, the 1st inst., at Clement's-inn, Mr. MacLaren in the chair. After the appointment of Messrs. Acland, Bartrum, and Maclaren to form a committee for the adjudica

The

RA LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.

the above society, held in the Law eping the 30th alt., Mr. H. it a debate took place upon the Section 12 of 18 Vict. c. 15, proat affect any lands as to purnitors, less it is registered. Fee of an unregistered an5. Le Nere 2 W. & T. Eq. Cas. e annuitant, nothwithstanding T.B.40, and cases there cited.

tion of the Cookson Prize, the motion on the paper, "That the imprisonment of the Rev. T. Pelham Dale is unjustifiable," was brought forward by Mr. C. Kains-Jackson, who was supported by Messrs. Bateman-Napier, Layman, Edlin, Robinson, Stevens, and Maxwell; and opposed by Messrs. Acland, Dowson, Strickland (a visitor), Spence, Harvey, and Ball. Mr. Jackson replied, and upon a division the motion was lost by a majority of three votes.

[blocks in formation]

The usual fortnightly meeting of the above society was held at the Law Library, on Tuesday, the 23rd inst., H. Walter Ibbotson, Esq., solicitor, presiding, at which there was a very fair attendance. The question for debate was as follows:-"A. contracts to sell fifty sacks of flour to B.; B. subsequently removes, and at the same time pays for ten sacks. One month afterwards, A. gives written notice to B. that, unless within fourteen days B. removes and pays for the remaining sacks, A. will rescind the contract and resell the goods. B. having failed to remove and pay for the remaining sacks, A. sells them at an advanced price. Can B. afterwards maintain an action against A. for damages for non-delivery of the remaining sacks, and, if so, what would be the measure of such damages ? The affirmative and negative sides were primarily represented by Messrs. Russell and Bennett respectively. During the course of the debate, in which the majority of those present took part, many arguments were brought to bear on the question, and distinctions drawn between certain of the numerous cases cited, and finally, after a summing up by the chairman, the question was put to the meeting, and decided almost unanimously in the affirmative. The question as to the measure of damages was not precisely ascertained, the meeting being of opinion that it was one for a jury. vote of thanks to Mr. Ibbotson brought the meeting to a close.

A

:

MANCHESTER LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. The fourth meeting of this society for the present session was held on Tuesday in the Law Library, Cross-street, under the presidency of J. W. Hamilton, Esq., LL.B., barrister-at-law. The matter for debate was as follows:"A. allows and pays his wife a sum of money for dress sufficient for her station in life, but upon condition that she is not to pledge his credit. Notwithstanding this, his wife obtains certain articles of dress from B., a draper, on credit. The price was reasonable, and the articles necessaries, in the sense that they are suitable to the wife's degree and condition in life. The agreement between her and her husband that she will not pledge his credit is unknown to B., the tradesman. (1.) Can B. maintain an action against A. for the price of the articles sold to his wife? (2.) Has he any remedy against the wife or her separate property? (3.) Is he entirely remediless?" Messrs. A. Smith and Steinberg, who, with those who supported them, were necessarily hampered by the decision of the House of Lords on Saturday last in the case of Debenham v. Mellon, but, nevertheless, made a stout fight in respect of their contention, argued that question No. 1 should be answered in the affirmative. Messrs. Price and Casper contended that the remedy of B. would be against the wife or her separate property, and Messrs. Law and Hawkins that he would be entirely remediless. In the discussion which ensued, Messrs. Rycroft, Peacock, Rayner, Hardman, Norton, Coward, Innes, and Butcher (hon. sec.) took part, and the learned chairman having summed up the arguments adduced, the first two questions were answered in the negative, and the third, therefore, was affirmed. The thanks of the society were then given to the chairman.

BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. At a meeting of the above society, held in the Law Library, on Tuesday evening, the 30th ult., Mr. H. Laken Smith in the chair, a debate took place upon the following moot point :-"Section 12 of 18 Vict. c. 15, provides that an annuity shall not affect any lands as to purchasers, mortgagees, and creditors, unless it is registered. Does an incumbrancer, with notice of an unregistered annuity, get priority over the annuitant, nothwithstanding this section?"-Le Neve v. Le Neve (2 W. & T. Eq. Cas. 35; Greaves v. Tofield (28 W. R. 840, and cases there cited).

The speakers in the affirmative were Messrs. Hooper, Crock-ford, O'Connor, and Robinson, and in the negative, Messrs. Barrows, Rogers, and Thursfield. After the chairman had summed up, the question was put to the meeting, and decided in the negative by the casting-vote of the chairman. A. vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the meeting.

LEGAL APPOINTMENTS.

Right Hon. JOHN DUKE COLERIDGE, Lord COLERIDGE, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas Division, has been appointed Lord Chief Justice of England, in succession to the late Sir Alexander Cockburn. Lord Coleridge is the eldest son of the Right Hon. Sir John Taylor Coleridge, many years a judge of the Court of Queen's Bench, and was born in 1821. He was educated at Eton, and was formerly scholar of Balliol College, Oxford. He graduated B.A. in 1842, and was subsequently elected a fellow of Exeter College. He was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1846, and practised on the Western Circuit. He became a Queen's Counsel in 1861, and he was for several years recorder of Portsmouth. From 1865 till 1873 he represented the city of Exeter in the Liberal interest. In December, 1868, on the formation of Mr. Gladstone's first administration, he was appointed Solicitor-General and received the honour of knighthood, and three years later he succeeded Sir Robert Collier as Attorney-General. In November, 1873, on the death of Sir William Bovill, he was appointed Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, and was shortly afterwards raised to the peerage and sworn a member of the Privy Council.

Mr. SAMUEL PRATT BERENS BUCKNILL, solicitor, who has been elected Assistant Secretary to the Incorporated Law Society, is the son of Dr. Samuel Birch Bucknill, of Rugby. He was educated at Rugby and at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated B.A. in 1872. He served his articles with Messrs. Meynell & Pemberton, of 20, White-hall-place, and was admitted a solicitor in 1875.

Mr. WILLIAM COXWELL, solicitor and notary, of Southampton, Lyndhurst, and Leamington, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women for Hampshire and the Town of Southampton.

Mr. HENRY HERVEY ELWES, solicitor (of the firm of Turner, Deane, & Elwes), of Colchester, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

Mr. BENJAMIN BRIDGES HUNTER RODWELL, Q.C., M.P., has been elected President of the West Suffolk Chamber of Agriculture.

Mr. JOSEPH STANLEY, solicitor, of Norwich, has been ap pointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women for the County of Norfolk and the City of Norwich.

COMPANIES.

WINDING-UP NOTICES. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES.

LIMITED IN CHANCERY.

BIRMINGHAM BREWING, MALTING, AND DISTILLING COMPANY, LIMI TED. Petition for winding up, presented Nov 22, directed to be heard before V.C. Hall on Dec 3. Deane and Co, South sq, Gray's inn, solicitors for the petitioners

FLAGSTAFF SILVER MINING COMPANY OF UTAH, LIMITED.-The M.R. has fixed Dec 6 at 11 at his chambers for the appointment of an official liquidator

HULL CEMENT AND LIME WORKS COMPANY, LIMITED.-The M.R. has fixed Dec 6 at 12 at his chambers for the appointment of an official liquidator

INCE HALL ROLLING MILLS COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Nov 24, directed to be heard before the M. R. on Dec 4. Sharpe and Co, Bedford row, for Peace and Co, Wigan, solicitors for the petitioners

LONDON AND SOUTHWARK INSURANCE CORPORATION, LIMITED.-By an order made by the M.R., dated Nov 8, it was ordered that the voluntary winding up of the company be continued. Tilleard and Co, Old Jewry, solicitors for the petitioners NAVIGATING TELEGRAPHS COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by the M.R., dated Nov 8, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Fox, Gray's inn sq, solicitor for the petitioner

« PreviousContinue »